Why Form a Militia Group

15 Pages·2021·0.09 MB·English

Section 1 Justification

1.4 The reasons to arm and organize

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the
Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government."

-- Declaration of Independence

1.4.1 Our civil rights are threatened

The Bible says that you are morally justified to arm yourself and band with others who
love liberty. American history shows that you stand in a great tradition if you arm and
organize yourself. The Constitution clearly recognizes your legal right to possess firearms
and join a militia. But should you want to?

The U.S. Army field manual on Guerrilla Warfare (FM 31-21, September, 1961, page 5)
says: "Resistance movements begin to form when dissatisfaction occurs among strongly
motivated individuals who cannot further their cause by peaceful or legal means."

So we must ask ourselves: Is there any reason to suspect that my personal liberties are in
jeopardy? Is there any indication that the government is systematically threatening my
rights? Is there any possibility that a tyranny could be established in the United States?

Affirmative answers to any of these questions should arouse our fervor for liberty and
motivate us to spring immediately and effectively to arms.

It will now be demonstrated that our liberties are in jeopardy, that our rights are
systematically threatened, and that tyranny can happen in the United States. (I am not
saying it will, I'm saying it could happen.) We will demonstrate this by examining the
status of our civil, gun, property, and state rights. First, here are some examples of
violated civil rights:

The right to life (Fifth Amendment):

For a generation we have had legalized abortion which denies the right of the unborn
child to live. While an individual's right to privacy cannot be restricted by the interests of
any majority, they are restricted by other individual rights. The Declaration of
Independence and Bible both imply that the right to life is superior to privacy.

President Clinton's proposed health care program will include "reproductive services"
like abortion (Senator John Glenn, form letter to constituents, 1/5/94). Not only will
abortion be legal, but every hospital will be required to perform them and public funds
will be used to pay for them. This means we are approaching the situation in communist
China where abortions are mandated by the state for all but the firstborn child.

President Clinton's health care program will include built- in euthanasia for "undesirable"
patients. If the state determines that you are too old, too disabled, or too mentally ill to
lead a "quality" life, medical care can and will be denied. (National Right to Life
Committee high priority communication, 1994, p. 2.)

Freedom of religion (First Amendment):

In the city of ----- it is technically illegal to conduct a worship service or church gathering
in a private residence. While this is rarely enforced, the fact that it is law says a lot! This
is somewhat typical of municipal zoning regulations against churches.

Attempts have recently been made to require state certification of private school teachers
and homeschoolers. While the attempts have failed for now, it is incomprehensible that
legislators and congressmen even consider such measures in light of the First
Amendment. Remember: licensing means state permission and certification means state
control!

The American 2000 education program is designed to standardize the curriculum in and
centralize control of all public schools by imposing "outcome based" education on all
school districts.

J. Gresham Machen wrote, "A public-school system, if it means the providing of free
education for those who desire it, is a noteworthy and beneficent achievement of modern
times; but when once it becomes monopolistic it is the most perfect instrument of tyranny
which has yet been devised" (Christianity & Liberalism, Eerdmans, 1923, p. 14).

It is a well-known communist tenet that if you can control the education of one
generation, you will control the government and lives of all subsequent generations.

Freedom of the press (First Amendment)

The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) regulates the radio and television
industry. While it is practically necessary to specify which stations can use which
frequencies, it is unconstitutional for the FCC to base station licensing on the content of
its programming.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a federal agency that funds public television.
PBS is by its very nature informational. Thus we have a situation that in principle
approaches having a state news agency like foreign dictatorships and autocratic
governments have.

At various times it has been required that radio stations and TV networks give equal time
to political candidates or views. The present push towards the Fairness Doctrine in
broadcasting is a case in point. While this is a sound practice for objective journalism, it
violates the First Amendment for the government to mandate which political views are
aired and how much coverage they should receive.

Searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment)

At one time when I was in high school, the sheriff's department routinely pulled over and
searched any and all cars carrying teenagers between two towns that had rival gangs. No
warrants were issued, and the only "probable cause" for criminal intent was the mere fact
that occupants happened to look like teenagers. This sort of thing happens all the time in
America and is rarely contested in the courts.

The Internal Revenue Service routinely has access to all of your bank records, including
microfiche copies of checks identifying who you do business with and what you buy,
without a warrant (Mark Skousen, Mark Skousen's Complete Guide to Financial Privacy,
chapters 1 and 2, 1979).

It has been alleged &emdash; although I have not confirmed it &emdash; that laws are on
the books which permit unlimited and unwarranted wire taps of private telephone lines
provided that they are not used in court. But the Fourth Amendment does not concern
court- related surveillance but any surveillance at all by any government official or
agency!

1.4.2 Our gun rights are threatened

In case you think your right to keep and bear arms is secure, just consider the following
(much of this happened just in 1993- 1994).

Historical gun control

Some of the first American gun control laws were intended to keep black slaves and even
free blacks from owning guns lest they free themselves (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact
Book, 1988, p. 129). Many of today's gun control initiatives are veiled attempts by the
American elite to keep guns out of the hands of the poor and blacks.

Nazis in Denmark, the military in Greece, and officials in Hungary have all used pre-
existing registered gun owners lists to confiscate weapons when they invaded or came to
power (Alan Gottlieb, Gun Rights Fact Book, 1988, pp. 88-89).

The U.S. 1968 Gun Control Act is a word-for-word translation of Adolf Hitler's German
gun control laws of 1938 Nazi Germany (T.C. Fry and Tony Lavinge, "Are You Aware
That ...", American Freedom Network).

Gun regulation

The Brady Bill was passed and signed into law by President Clinton requiring a five-day
waiting period and criminal background check for all handgun purchases in late
November, 1993 and was effective 3/1/94.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen (who oversees the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms or BATF) proposed raising the licensing fee for gun dealers from $66 to $600
per year for the express purpose of putting 200,000 out of 284,000 American gun dealers
out of business. (Wall Street Journal, 1/5/94, p. A1).

Gun licensing

The 1968 Gun Control Act outlaws the possession of all automatic weapons and "short-
barreled" rifles or shotguns unless they are licensed by and registered with the BATF.

Virtually all municipalities require a person to have a "carry permit" or license to openly
carry a loaded gun in his or her car or on the street or to carry any concealed weapons on
his or her person.

Gun registration

A yellow federal form must be completed for every purchase of a gun from a dealer.
These forms include your name, address, type and serial number of the gun bought, and
answers to several questions. While this is not called "registration" because the records
are kept by the dealer only, the BATF is allowed to make a warrantless search of these
records each year and may "borrow" them for further inspection and perhaps copying (Up
to Date, "BATF Abuses of Gun Owners' Rights," The Second Amendment Foundation,
1994).

All guns must be registered in states such as Illinois and New York.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen proposed registration of "street sweeper" semi-
automatic shotguns because they have no sporting use (U.S. News & World Report,
3/14/94). What about militia use?

Gun taxation

The 1968 Gun Control Act outlaws the possession of automatic weapons without a $200
transfer tax being paid to the BATF.

It is now seriously being considered that a sharp tax be placed on certain kinds of
ammunition to help fund the national health program.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen also proposed a sharp tax increase on "street sweeper"
semi-automatic shotguns because they have no sporting use (U.S. News & World Report,
3/14/94).

Gun prohibition

Former Governor Wilder of Virginia proposed that citizens of Virginia be limited to the
purchase of one gun per moth. Similar proposals are even now being pressed and
considered in the U.S. Congress.

Foreign assault rifles are banned for import and sale in the U.S.

The city of Cleveland passed an outright ban on the sale and ownership of semi-
automatic "assault rifles" in 1989 and the Ohio Supreme Court upheld as "Constitutional"
this law in 1993. ("Crime Fighters Have a New Tool in Deadly Work," 8/22/93, p. A-1).

Columnist Bob Greene of The Chicago Tribune has proposed abolishing the Second
Amendment altogether and enforcing gun bans by sweeping house-to-house police
searches and seizures for all guns ("A Gun-Free Nation? Just Think About It," 8/28/93, p.
2).

Sarah Brady of Handgun Control wants national gun control laws, a ban on semi-
automatic "assault rifles," and says, "It simply doesn't make any sense at all for private
citizens to be permitted to buy military equipment that was designed solely for killing
people in combat" (Sarah Brady, Handgun Control newsletter, p. 2, 1993).

The U.S. Senate voted 56-43 to ban "19 specific assault weapons" and all detachable
magazines that hold more than 10 rounds on November 17, 1993 (Wall Street Journal,
"Senate, 56-43 Votes," 11/18/93, p. A24).

The House is also debating banning assault weapons and 10+ round magazines ("Reports
from Washington," February 1994).

Gun law enforcement abuses

The BATF is known to have routinely and intentionally given false answers to inquiries
about gun regulations so they could raid the person's house and arrest them (Up to Date,
"BATF Abuses of Gun Owners' Rights," the Second Amendment Foundation, 1994).

The BATF raided the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas although all charges
were previously investigated and dropped, using falsified information to obtain a warrant,
by shooting first, and by misinforming the public (Waco: The Big Lie, video tape, 1993).

The BATF attempted to entrap Randy Weaver in Idaho. When he refused to become one
of their henchmen, his cabin was put under 24-hour BATF surveillance, leading to a
surprise confrontation that left Weaver's son and wife dead and Weaver acquitted of any
wrongdoing ("It Could Happen to You," by Charlie Reese, 1/11/94, p. 4).

New anti-gun developments as of 3/26/94

In the couple of weeks since printing this material several attacks on gun rights have
come to my attention which deserve being mentioned.

First, the Senate-approved ban on semi-automatic weapons which is now pending in the
House (a vote is expected around April 1, 1994) actually would ban much more than
politicians admit. Supposedly, it would ban only specific models such as the TEC-22,
TEC-9, AK-475, Uzi, Galil, AR-70, MAC-10, MAC-11, MAC-12, AR-15, and Steyr
AUG to name just a few. However....

The BATF admits that 26 other models of firearms would be banned by the language of
this bill. This is 45 firearms, not 19 as claimed.

Furthermore, any semi-automatic with a detachable magazine would also be banned if it
has any two additional military features such as a folding stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug,
flash suppressor, etc.

If the bill becomes law and you own one of these firearms, you will have 90 days to
surrender your rifle or to register it. After that, non-compliance could result in a $1,000
fine, six months in prison, and permanent loss of any right to own any firearm forever!

Second, as if this is not bad enough, on February 28, 1994, Congressman Schumer and
Senator Metzenbaum introduced legislation which advocates:

Banning magazines that can hold more than six rounds of ammunition and an outright
ban on all "Saturday night specials" or cheap handguns.

Federal registration and licensing of all handguns in the United States and limiting
purchases of handguns to only one gun per month.

Making all gun shows and gun sales illegal, requiring gun dealers to sell only at their one
licensed place of business, and raising the gun dealers license fee to a staggering $1000
per year.

Imposing a 30 percent tax on all handgun sales and a 50 percent tax on all handgun
ammunition sales.

Requiring individuals to obtain an "arsenal license" if they own more than 20 firearms or
if they own more than 1000 rounds of ammunition.

These "arsenal licenses" would cost $300, be subject to government approval, and would
require BATF inspections (i.e., invasions) of your home three times per year to maintain.

The really subversive thing about these two bills is that they are aimed at limiting militias
more than at limiting crime. Military features on rifles like folding stocks, pistol grips,
and flash suppressors are useful on a battlefield but immaterial in committing a murder or
bank robbery. How many criminals bayonet someone? Moreover, limiting the amount of
ammunition we can own to 1000 rounds does not do anything for violent crime. It only
takes one loaded magazine holding a few rounds to knock over a bank or blow someone's
brains out. But it takes an "arsenal" of thousands of rounds of ammunition to be ready to
oppose the government.

1.4.3 Our property rights are threatened

Your property rights are also under attack. Virtually everything possible is being done to
take away whatever wealth you have.

Taking property without a trial (Fifth Amendment)

The Fifth Amendment states: "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law."

The Internal Revenue Service has the power to put a lien on your house, attach your
paycheck, and confiscate your property without a trial by jury and without your
conviction if they unilaterally determine that you have evaded taxes (Tax Loopholes:
Everything the Law Allows, Boardroom Classics, 1993).

Various police departments across the country routinely confiscate homes, cars, and other
possessions of those arrested for dealing in drugs and sell these properties to raise funds
before the person arrested has been convicted of wrongdoing by a jury and whether or not
it is demonstrated that drug money was used to buy the property.

Taking property for public use (Fifth Amendment)

The Fifth Amendment also states: "nor shall private property be taken for public use,
without just compensation."

The use of your property can and is restricted by municipal zoning codes, state and
federal environmental laws, and other governmental regulations for "the public good,"
even if the use of the property that is forbidden does not harm the lives or property of
others.

All of these regulations somehow limit the personal use of the property and many limit or
reduce the property's commercial productivity or value on the real estate market.

While the courts recognize that these practices reduce the uses and value of private
property, they have ruled they are Constitutional because they are only "partial takings"
not total takings of property (Richard A. Epstein, Takings: Private Property and the
Power of Eminent Domain, Harvard, 1985). In other words, it is legal for the government
to seize your property-without compensation-as long as they don't take all of it!

Income taxes are unconstitutional

Originally income taxes were illegal because the Constitution required all taxes to be
apportioned among the states proportional to their populations, not their incomes.

The 16th Amendment, which permits federal income taxes, was not ratified in the same
language by three fourths of the United States as required by Article V of the
Constitution and is therefore invalid. The approved wording was different in different

states and therefore they ratified different amendments! ("Is Income Tax Un-American
and Illegal?", July and August, 1993, pp. 14-16).

The courts refuse to cast down the 16th Amendment even though it was not legally
ratified.

Progressive taxes are unconstitutional

As we have seen, the Fifth Amendment prohibits taking property for public use without
compensation.

State and federal income taxes are "progressive" taxes meaning that the higher your
income, the higher the percentage of your income you pay in taxes. The purpose and
effect of this progressive tax structure is to redistribute wealth from one group to another.
High wage earners are taxed to fund welfare and other entitlements. In other words, their
property (money) is taken for the public good without compensation in total violation of
the Fifth Amendment.

The fact that this tax structure is propped up by a majority consensus is immaterial. "The
Bible says, 'Thou shalt not steal.' It does not say, 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority
vote'" (Gary North, "Free Market Capitalism" in Wealth & Poverty: Four Christian Views
of Economics, edited by Robert G. Clouse, InterVarsity, 1984, p. 41).

Excessive taxes are unconstitutional

At the time of the American Revolution, European-type serfdom was considered a form
of slavery and consisted of paying 25% of a peasant's productivity from farming land to
the landlord.

For 1993, American tax rates were as follows for a family with a taxable income of
$25,000:

Social Security 12.40% of income (Half paid by employer)

Medicare 2.90% of income (Half paid by employer

Federal income tax 15.00% of income (Up to 39.6% for rich)

Income tax 2.67% of income (Up to 7.5% for rich)

State 7% sales tax 2.00% of income (All money isn't spent)

County property taxes 3.00% of income

City income tax 2% of income

This does not include hidden taxes like employer contributions to workers compensation
(between 2% and 14%!), gasoline taxes, tariffs on imported goods, "sin" taxes on tobacco
and alcoholic beverages, and so on, and so on, and so on. Therefore today's typical
American citizen can pay between 40% and 70% of his income or productivity in the
form of some kind of tax.

The tax system is thus a subtle form of slavery and violates the 13th Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States (Robert J. Villella, "A New Declaration," July/August
1993, p. 17).

Hotel taxes are unAmerican

States and communities commonly tax hotels, amusement parks, and some restaurants at
higher rates than other businesses. Generally this "hotel" tax is two or three times as high
as the area's sales tax.

The obvious purpose of such taxes is to make tourists from out of town pay higher taxes
than the locals. As the maxim says, "Don't tax you, and don't tax me. Tax that man
behind the tree!"

This practice is clearly contrary to the American principle of "no taxation without
representation!

1.4.4 State rights are non-existent

The state rights guarantied by the Tenth Amendment are universally ignored by every
branch of the federal government.

The way things should be:

Article X of the Bill of Rights states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively,
or to the people." Unless the Constitution specifically grants a power to a branch of the
federal government, or says that states cannot do something, it is presumed that the
authority and power rests with the states. In other words, Whenever there is a conflict
between the laws of federal and state governments, the state law which should take

precedent and prevail over the federal law, not vise versa, unless the Constitution says
otherwise.

As we saw previously, the whole Bill of Rights is designed as a limitation on federal
powers. The Tenth Amendment serves this purpose by dividing and diluting power
among the several states. Indeed, it was state governments that ratified the Constitution
and delegated authority to the federal government. This being the case, they only handed
over authority to the federal government to do what is specified in the Constitution and
nothing more.

The way things really are:

Obviously, the Tenth Amendment is routinely ignored by the president, the Congress,
and the courts. In extra-constitutional matters, state laws should override federal laws.
But in fact, federal laws always override state laws. National speed limits

supersede state speed limits. Federal environmental rules outweigh similar state rules. In
every governmental matter, the only state laws that exist are those compatible with
federal laws or which the federal government has seen fit not to address at all.

One of the best examples of the total disregard for state rights is federal mandates. The
federal government frequently mandates that states enact certain laws, provide certain
services, or fund specific programs that cost millions or billions of dollars without one
cent of federal funding to support the mandate.

Don't be fooled by the fact that states are permitted to do things that Washington does not
do. Remember, permission and rights are incompatible. In some matters, Congress et al.
simply do not want to flex their muscles. For instance, during the Reagan administration,
a major shift in power took place away from federal agencies to state agencies. But this
was because liberals in Washington recognized that Ronald Reagan sought deregulation.
Since state agencies were more active regulators than their federal counterparts,
responsibilities were conveniently transferred to the states to sustain strong industry
regulation. But this whole scheme is Washington's doing and not the result of any state's
right to govern.

The point here is not that state governments are any more noble or benevolent than the
federal government. They are not because they consist of the same frail human beings
that are susceptible to corruption by power. The point is something that is spelled out
clear as day in the Constitution is always and everywhere totally and completely turned
on its head!

A call to Assemble!

From every legitimate angle, we are justified in keeping and bearing arms as well as
forming or joining a militia independent of government control. The Bible tells us we are
morally right. The American Revolution shows we have the historical right. The
Constitution protects our legal right. Moreover, our Constitutional liberties are
systematically being eroded and denied. The fact that officials are infringing gun rights
on every front is simply a manifestation of their inner tendency to empower themselves.
Left unchecked, this tendency will lead to genuine tyranny. Remember, "Power corrupts
and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

So this is a pivotal point in American history. If the government is successful in banning
semi-automatic paramilitary weapons, then they will be emboldened not only to further
infringe gun rights, but to infringe all rights. This is because the Second Amendment is
the teeth of the Bill of Rights, and assault rifles are the teeth of the Second Amendment.
Without their bite, there is nothing to prevent a draconian state from devouring all of our
precious liberties.

Your right and duty is to arm and organize yourself against further federal and state
encroachments on your liberties. As a minimum, you should purchase and learn how to
effectively use a firearm, preferably a so-called assault rifle. The more citizens that own
guns, the less willing the government will be to threaten us. Ideally, you should also join
a local militia, committed to constitutional principles. You need to be organized,
equipped, trained, and coordinated with other like-minded men to effectively stand up to
the growing arrogance of the federal government. It was said during the American
Revolution that "united we stand, divided we fall." This is still true today. So arm
yourself. Organize yourselves. And prepare to fight if you have to.

We could learn a lot from the Swiss. They are zealously neutral and refuse to meddle in
foreign affairs. Neither should we be aggressors or wish to start bloodshed. But
Switzerland is also a virtual armed camp of citizen soldiers prepared to fight to the last
man for their freedom. Major H. von Dach of the Swiss army put it this way:

"If two enemies fight each other to the last &emdash; and this is always the case when an
ideology is involved (religion is part of it) &emdash; guerrilla warfare and civilian
resistance will inevitably break out in the final phase. "The military expert who
undervalues or even disregards guerrilla warfare makes a mistake since he does not take
into consideration the strength of the heart.

"The last, and admittedly, most cruel battle will be fought by civilians. It will be
conducted under the fear of deportation, of execution, and concentration camps.

"We must and will win this battle since each Swiss [in our case American] male and
female in particular believe in the innermost part of their hearts &emdash; even if they
are too shy and sober in everyday life to admit or even speak about it &emdash; in the old
and yet very up-to-date saying: 'Death rather than slavery!'"

&emdash; Major H. von Dach, Total Resistance: Swiss Army Guide to Guerrilla Warfare
and Underground Resistance, Paladin Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1958/1963, p. 173,
emphasis added.

1.4.5 Discussion questions

Are you convinced that the cases cited are factual infringements of our rights by the
government? If not, which ones are you skeptical of? Are you skeptical that these things
actually occur or that they are really unconstitutional? Do you need more substantiation?

Have you ever personally experienced any of these improprieties? Which ones? Do you
think you might experience them in the future?

Which of these violations of personal liberties is (are) most alarming, shocking, or
ominous to you? Why?

Would you classify the attack on your rights as insignificant or dangerous? As isolated or
systematic? As careless or intentional?

On a scale of 1 to 10, how alarmed are you at the present status of your liberty? What else
would have to happen to make you alarmed?

Do you believe the present attack on personal liberties is more or less widespread and
serious than during the days leading up to the American Revolution? How are things
worse? How are they better?

Does it reassure you that these improprieties are done by or with the knowledge of
elected officials instead of a military dictator? How is this similar to 1775-1776 when the
British Parliament suppressed American liberties? How is it different?

What are your thoughts on joining a militia in your community? What are your
reservations?

At this point it would be premature to ask you for your commitment to the PA Militia.
You do not yet know who we are, what we stand for, why we exist, when we are willing
to fight, or how we are organized. Section 2 of this field manual addresses these issues by
explaining:

2.1 Who and what is the Militia?

2.2 Equipping yourself for the Militia

2.3 General organization of the Militia

2.4 Secrecy and security in the Militia

Main ideas of this section

Your civil rights to life, free religion, free press, and security from unreasonable searches
and seizures are systematically being threatened.

Your right to keep and bear arms is systematically infringed by regulation, licensing,
registration, taxation, and prohibition of all kinds of firearms.

Your property rights are systematically violated by having property taken without trial,
without compensation, and through confiscatory taxation.

State rights are universally denied since, in principle, state laws should prevail over
federal laws while, in practice, the opposite always happens.

Further study

The best way to follow developments related to your Constitutional liberties is to pay
attention to newspapers and news magazines (television news is too surface and
sensational to give any reliable information).

I might also suggest a couple of video tapes. The video on the massacre in Waco, Texas
is very chilling since it presents actual visual images of BATF abuses of power.

America in Peril

Thompson, Linda D. Waco: The Big Lie, American Justice Federation, 3850 S. Emerson
Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46203, 1993.